Unlistenable 2010 bootlegs

Spencer wrote:

There's a huge and very audible difference in the quality of the boots since Brett Eliason left. It's a shame but hey, what ya gonna do. I doubt anything's going to change much, there's been slight improvements from 2008 through to 2010 but unless Brett comes back into the team, I don't predict any major changes for the better.

At least we've got the 2000 boots to enjoy, they're a total treat in both performance and sound quality.

John Briggs 2008 wrote:

heyjose wrote:

I agree with much of what has been said here. I'm grateful for the opportunity to hear a fairly decent quality recording of these shows, but forking out the cash to do so each time and getting a sub-par product in return... that does suck, and I don't think the band would prefer it that way either.

Can anyone tell me which 2010 ones are worth buying?

So far have Columbus, Cleveland and MSG2, and Columbus is the best sounding by far.

Exactly what makes them subpar?

John Briggs 2008 wrote:

satans kitchen wrote:

Paul Andrews wrote:

If you went to your favorite restaurant and always ordered a delicious juicy steak and then all of a sudden they started to serve you a chewy dried up chunk of meat would you complain or just be thankful for your food?

1. You choose to return to the restaurant after being served a bad meal in hopes that they were just a bad day... You return to Pearl Jam because they freakin rock and they are human....we cant all be perfect all the time.

2. You promote http://www.pearljamboots.com in your signature whilst simultaneously complaining about the boots :think:

3. Has anyone taken into consideration that each venue has different sound? Some complain about crowd noise too loud, or PJ having too much echo....did you consider it was an indoor venue and the loud sound is bouncing off the walls? Same goes for outdoor venues...some sound may just trail off making some speculate that the sound wasnt quite as loud as another boot.....OR the fact that these guys are somehow still running around in circles (Mike, Stone) or Eddie jumping, climbing, falling on his ass possibly taking him away from the mic for a second.....you cant see that while listening to the boot - you just assume Stone, Mike, Eddie just got "lost in the mix" for a second.

If we all can't agree on the quality of items that this band provides...can we at least make a point to show some love for their attempts? Just out of curiosity, how many other bands provide boots of each and every night of their shows....for a nominal price? Aside from Phish I personally am not aware of any others....

I don't see where Paul has promoted my site http://www.pearljamboots.com at all in his posts. You must be confusing him with me. Also, my site link is in my signature and not his and I also have not complained about the bootlegs at all in this thread. I have posted in a very supportive and constructive manner to ensure that this thread doesn't sway away from constructive feedback regarding the bootlegs. People have various opinions and they all count and the band camp pays attention. So I spend time in this thread to ensure that all feedback is informative and valid to the point. Why? Because I care and don't want it to be taken out of context. Take a look here at my stance and concerns: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=134823&start=165#p3052915

Ps. What does my site have to do with any of this thread to begin with?

Evacuation Rules wrote:

locked wrote:

you know this got me to think..

anyone up to a re-mastering project for some select favorites? Why not? I seen people remaster all sorts of audio!

I've seen folks re-master audience bootlegs...

why not give Boston, MSG and some other 2010 boots a shot?

:?:

It's the mix that sucks, not the mastering. You can't fix that.

given2fly23 wrote:

I have listened to every show that has been officially released (as well as 99% of the pre-2000 shows that were taped) and have never complained about the sound of the official bootlegs.

I listened to Columbus 2010 this week, and it is bad.